[PATCH] Try to resolve paths in threader without looking further back.

[Jeff Law]

On 10/25/2021 12:49 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 8:42 PM Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/24/2021 12:25 PM, Aldy Hernandez wrote:
>>> On 10/24/21 6:57 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Ughhhh....we could put the test back, check for some random large
>>>>> number, and come up with a more satisfactory test later? ;-)
>>>> I thought our "counting" based tests could only check equality (ie,
>>>> expect to see this string precisely N times).  Though if we could
>>>> check that # threads realized was > some low water mark, that'd
>>>> probably be better than what we've got right now.
>>> Andrew actually had a patch for a dejagnu construct doing just that
>>> (scan-tree-dump-minimum), but I just noticed it didn't work quite
>>> right for this test.
>>>
>>> This is a bit embarrassing, but upon further analysis I've just
>>> noticed that the number of threadable candidates has been exploding
>>> over the year, but the ones that actually make it past the block
>>> copier restrictions plus rewire_first_differing_edge, etc, only
>>> changed by 1 with this patch.  So perhaps we don't need to bend over
>>> backward (just yet anyhow).
>>>
>>> I can leave the simple gimple FE test since I've already coded it.
>>> Up to you.
>> I'd keep the gimple FE test.  I can easily see coming back to this ;-)
>>
>>> How does this look?
>> Looks good for the trunk to me.
> Thanks Jeff.
>
> I will commit the other patch from this series as well as the
> testsuite change, both of which you approved.  Also, I was going to
> commit the following as obvious until I noticed it depended on the
> other patches:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/582232.html
Just to be explicit, that patch is fine too.

>
> I think it's now obvious, but if you have an objection, let me know.
>
> It'll be a while, cause I need to rest everything again on x86 and
> ppc64.  I'm tired of getting mail from CI bots :).
>
> Thanks for your feedback and patience.
Thanks for digging into this stuff.  It's ripe for some developer love.

jeff